one thing I noticed on page after page was that the models looked unnatural. I would even venture to say that they looked like corpses or zombies. Their eyes were airbrushed with dark circles. Their faces were expressionless. And their poses were a bad impression of a mannequin.

This is my hang up with "High Fashion". I do not and never will understand it. If you ask me, its just ugly. I think if more people would be honest with them selves they would say the same thing. However, the ones leading that industry give the idea that if you don't "Love" what they put in those magazines, you have no vision or sense of style. So be it, its their world and they do what they want with it. Guess I just have the option to not look at it.

I might have an explanation (though a fuzzy one):
Yesterday I was watching a TV show where they were following the work of fashion photographers Leda & St.Jacques (their website) on a shoot for a local paper. They were said to be the best photographers in Canada (that's a pretty high statement which I will not comment on... they're highly respected in the region). On the shoot, they were using a Hasselblad H1 (or similar) with digi back (like expected). The only thing that somewhat bugged me is they were using a fairly wide angle lens for the shoot. Their studio had plenty of space left to use a longer focal length but they still were shooting a shoulder and head shot at about 5 feet from the subject (I might be generous there since the TV camera lens can lie). Back home, they began retouching the image using the Liquify plug-in in photoshop. Resizing the ears, nose and eyes to remove the wide angle artifacts. Then, they began softening the the skin's wrinkles caused by the use of a single very large softbox directly overhead. They didn't use a reflector to even out the tones. They were lightening the tones with the dodge & burn tools adding highlights to the cheeks. They also desaturated part of the image. And after that, they were sending the image to a professional photo retoucher before it even made it to the paper.

As predicted, the final image was said to be a masterpiece. The client was happy (they said "hearing from an happy client is almost worth a good paycheck"... notice the word "almost"). (I am translating this from French, but the gist is the same).

After seeing that, I figured that it looks better to say the image was heavily doctored than to say it was perfect on first shot. I think you can draw your own conclusions here.

I thought they would have been tired of that effect by now as it has been running for a few years. I guess some trends last more than a saison. I've read somewhere once, that because of that they where going back to film to return the more natural, warm look. Maybe one day they will as I don't see the "zombie" or "robotic" mannequin look to last forever. Digital always looks so metallic and cold...

aristotelis grammatikakiswww.arigram.grReal photographs, created in camera, 100% organic,
no digital additives and shit

I read a decidedly un-PC review of the fashion industry that focused specifically on the models and presentation. It stated that (with more than a small amount of supporting evidence) the prevalence of gay men holding principle positions in the fashion industry accounted for the look and trajectory. According to the author, at its worst there was an undercurrent of misogyny in the presentation and in general the female model type often shared as much physically with a boy as they would with a woman (essentially skinny effeminate boys with breasts).

I don't follow the industry enough to have a developed opinion, but it was an interesting read.

Place ring flash on DSLR.
Place model against wall, backdrop, or set from 70's wedding studio. Tell her that her puppy or goldfish died.
Take image.
Load RAW file in Aperture or LightRoom.
Ad "vibrancy" and "vignette", slightly de-saturate non vibrant tones, and perhaps blues. Lower black point.

The hardest part of all this is convincing someone that you're the one to get the big bucks to do this.

Last edited by JBrunner; 03-28-2009 at 08:16 PM. Click to view previous post history.